neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA | deploy and buy
why not let the people who want it now just buy the DOCSIS3 modems? yes i know they are not retail avaialble yet.. but you could still sell them to the user via the cable co. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | The modems are expensive so I hear. As much as a few hundred $$$s. |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
 ·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to neufuse
said by neufuse  :why not let the people who want it now just buy the DOCSIS3 modems? yes i know they are not retail avaialble yet.. but you could still sell them to the user via the cable co. Majority of user don't have a need for it
You need 50mbps tier to make use of docsis 3.0
You can get 50mbps tier with docsis 2.0 but it will be like
42mbps/10mbps
Good enough for me
docsis 3.0 useless for now |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to iansltx
said by iansltx :The modems are expensive so I hear. As much as a few hundred $$$s. Upgrading to 3.0 for speed of 12/2 won't increase speed or performance
Very few user will get it most of us will be fine with 2.0 or 1.0
Another waste of hardware upgrade
Cable haven't even used up 42/10 on docsis 1.0 for any subscriber
If we are offered 42/10, my bandwidth use would slow everyone down to a crawl. Cable technology is limited by bandwidth not how fast you can download/upload  |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
 ·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Wait...that's like saying a car isn't limited by speed, jsut by how fast it can go.
DOCSIS 3 bonds channels to allow for extra bandwidth, and thence higher quality of service, and thence the ability for higher speed packages. Yes, you can push 30/5 over DOCSIS 2, but it's hard to do. DOCSIS 3 is all about headroom.
Also, DOCSIS 3 isn't for 12/2. It's for 22/5 or 50/10 or 60/5. It's pointless if your node isn't overcrowded on the last mile an you'r eonly offering 10/1, but as speeds increase yoou're gonna want better DOCSIS.
Again, DOCSIS 3 allows for Nx38/30 (and eventually Nx30) connectivity on the last mile. It alleviates congestion issues, and allows for greater speeds.
Of course, fiber can do all of this no problem, but you know the spiel... |
|
koolkid1563
Premium,MVM
join:2005-11-06
Powell, WY
clubs:
·Bresnan Online
| The Bresnan node we were on had 200+ subs on it according to what one of the techs told me. The internet always slowed to a literal crawl during peak hours and we couldn't expect to get any download speeds above 2Mb/s no matter what time of the day it was. Their claim is that no server (not even Microsoft's or Nvidia's) can push anything faster than 2Mb/s and that their network is more than adequate to handle it...Though they also said that I could only expect downloads of 2Mb/s max on their 15/1 tier. I could do it on my 10Mb/s connection on U-verse and I can do it now on the 10Mb/s FTTP connection I have through Powellink. Right now Bresnan is offering 8/384 or 15/1, but neither tier actually delivered.
DOCSIS 3 might help with the oversubscribed nodes giving them more headroom, but I don't think it will help their network backhauls which seem saturated as well. I also don't expect them to be upgrading the Powell market anytime soon if ever. On the TV side they haven't deployed VoD here due to the deployment costs being too high, so I doubt they will do anything with the internet either. In the meantime, the Powellink network will have time to mature and flex it's muscles and get a couple faster tiers going while Bresnan remains on DOCSIS 1.1. |
|
Pizz
Hi
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| It's all about the last mile run, with MSOs. Majority of these last mile runs, are all running on outdated hardware. I don't understand why the Cable COs just improve that in their network, instead of doing inept patch jobs, or implementing a service, they cannot provide. |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| reply to iansltx
DOCSIS 3 modems are about $20 to $25 higher in price and this is expected to drop with volume.
Price is not the issue. The issue is the lack of desire to deploy higher speed services lacking competition.
-p
said by iansltx :The modems are expensive so I hear. As much as a few hundred $$$s. |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| reply to jadebangle
This begs the larger question ... what is the "true desire" for much higher speed access. It is easy to say more is better but at what point does the value proposition change??
I agree that DOCSIS 3.0 deployed to support DOCSIS 2.0 service classes makes no sense ... unless there is an expectation that the mass market customer will eventually be purchasing a product with access speeds exceeding 20 Mb/s.
-p |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| reply to percosan
said by percosan :DOCSIS 3 modems are about $20 to $25 higher in price and this is expected to drop with volume. Price is not the issue. The issue is the lack of desire to deploy higher speed services lacking competition. I suggest you look at a parts catalog again.
Even the Linksys WCM300-NA "linksys D3.0 DS Channel Bonding Cable Modem-DOCSIS" is still listed with an MSRP of $500. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to koolkid1563
So I hear. It's pitiful when a provider like Bresnan not only has node congestion issues (caused by DOCSIS 1.1 plus high people counts per node...though honestly 200 or so is average) but also has uplink bandwidth problems despite their use of cheap networks (360 etc.).
Bottom line: PowelLink is an amazing example of what places should do. That is to say, provide FTTH, high upload/download speeds, non-sucky access by building out their own infrastructure (fiber) that pretty much won't have to be replaced ever again |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| reply to espaeth
I can guarantee you that this is accurate. Again, the Linksys modem cited below is another example of a proprietary (read NOT DOCSIS 3.0) cable modem that implements downstream channel bonding on 3 channels. When you read the text of their documentation, they are careful not to call it a DOCSIS 3 modem.
The minimum channel bonding requirement to be considered DOCSIS 3.0 is 4 in both the up and down stream. There are more feature (less headline but important) that are also included in DOCSIS 3.0.
No clue what the $500 is ... but I am sure that this is not the price of D3 modems that are available today.
-s
said by espaeth :said by percosan :DOCSIS 3 modems are about $20 to $25 higher in price and this is expected to drop with volume. Price is not the issue. The issue is the lack of desire to deploy higher speed services lacking competition. I suggest you look at a parts catalog again. Even the Linksys WCM300-NA "linksys D3.0 DS Channel Bonding Cable Modem-DOCSIS" is still listed with an MSRP of $500. |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| reply to iansltx
Careful ... you can deploy FTTH and still offer a crappy service.
DOCSIS 3.0, if deployed, will achieve the objectives you describe below.
-s
said by iansltx :So I hear. It's pitiful when a provider like Bresnan not only has node congestion issues (caused by DOCSIS 1.1 plus high people counts per node...though honestly 200 or so is average) but also has uplink bandwidth problems despite their use of cheap networks (360 etc.). Bottom line: PowelLink is an amazing example of what places should do. That is to say, provide FTTH, high upload/download speeds, non-sucky access by building out their own infrastructure (fiber) that pretty much won't have to be replaced ever again |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to jadebangle
jadebangle
You do not need a 50Mbps tier to take advantage of D3. D3 CAN be used to increase speed, but it can also be used (without speed tier increase) to help with channel congestion. A D3 modem has 4 channels(downstream currently) to split or pick and choose from. If channels 1-3 are fully congested, but channel 4 is clear, the modem can download on channel 4. If all 4 channels are congested it can distribute its load (from that individual customer) evenly across all 4 channels or any combination that best fits the needs. Now all that assumes that the issue is at the node and not between the node and the internet. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to percosan
The difference is that, once FTTH is in the ground, you just upgrade the equipment on the ends of the fiber and watch your speed go through the roof. As in gigabits, tens of gigabits or even hundreds of gigabits per second. Cable is going to run into problems pretty quickly even with DOCSIS 3 if fiber truns on the heat anywhere.
One big thing right now: uploads. 30 Mbps per node. FiOS has no problem doing 20 Mbit symmetric. Cable companies can't do this without breaking their networks.
Heck, even downloads are iffy. Four channels bonded gets 152 Mbps of bandwidth, shared between everyone on the node. BPON shares 622 Mbps with everyone on the node, GPON shares 2.4 Gbps. THe big difference: cable companies have an order of magnitude more subscribers per node than PON systems do, or close to it, in normal instances. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | i don't see cable having any issues. they're fiber is farther out to the customers and can quickly run the last mile to fiber as well. I wouldn't doubt many new build outs and upgrades have the FTTH/HFC equipment at the nodes just for that. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to percosan
said by percosan :Price is not the issue. The issue is the lack of desire to deploy higher speed services lacking competition. You hit that nail right on the head!
thats why the "select areas" cable is deploying D3 in, are fios areas[haves]
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee |
|
Fubar
join:2001-02-20
Phoenix, AZ | reply to percosan
»www.google.com/products/catalog?···-sellers |
|
percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| Thanks for this ... it made my day
My numbers are still accurate though. And as we are sharing links ... »www.lightreading.com/document.as···site=cdn
-p |
|
